You are better off not matching up to an MBTI type description...

[LPolaright]

I'd like to say that I read 2 pages out of the three in this thread, skimmed the third because it became a little bit less objective and started discussing about unrelated subjects like personal typing (but then again, I only skimmed it so I'm not exactly sure).

I've got a couple of questions:
Adymus, you seems to reject the MBTI system badly, but are you rejecting only step 1 or step 2 aswell? (since step 2 is supposedly more accurate)
Also, if one system fits 60-75% of people accurately and it seems to work, wont it be a waste of time for you to start a new system up that will only be helpfull for the 40-25% that wont be typed accurately? (just saying)
These who are too developed to actually be typed as one thing will eventually realize that, wont they? Otherwise they are not as developed as you thought and they might search for a better typing solution but then again, why? Sure, it will give more insight about themselves... But if you really want to gather insight about yourself, as a really developed personality you will eventually do it by themselves.

And a little question on the side for better understanding:
Would you say that wanting to be a certain type affects the preference for a type?
(I'd say no, because these are two very different things - but somehow there's something not very clear behind this)

I just want to say, looking at some of the posts here and the dynamic discussion between people here, I'm very proud to be typed as an INTP (even if I'm really not) and hell I wish that there was some sort of an INTP gathering somewhere.

 

[Adymus]

Adymus, you seems to reject the MBTI system badly, but are you rejecting only step 1 or step 2 aswell? (since step 2 is supposedly more accurate)

The MBTI is not broken into steps, so wtf is step 1 and 2? And no if it seemed I only disagreed with the tests and descriptions then I apologize for misleading you, I disagree with at 80% to 90% of their principles as well.

Also, if one system fits 60-75% of people accurately and it seems to work, wont it be a waste of time for you to start a new system up that will only be helpfull for the 40-25% that wont be typed accurately? (just saying)

First of all MBTI is typing much less than 60% to 75% accurately, and it barely works for a handful of people. Why would a more accurate system only be useful to 40-25%? The fact that the MBTI bases their calculations on mistyped samples means just about every assumption they have made is potentially (and probably is) off base. A new system necessary, not just to type people accurately, but to go back and correct MBTI's work.

These who are too developed to actually be typed as one thing will eventually realize that, wont they?

No, what are they going to do? Relate to the other descriptions that sound nothing like them?

Otherwise they are not as developed as you thought and they might search for a better typing solution but then again, why? Sure, it will give more insight about themselves... But if you really want to gather insight about yourself, as a really developed personality you will eventually do it by themselves.

Being able to properly type yourself has very little to do with how developed you are, in fact the more developed you are, the harder it is going to be, and you won't know how to do it by yourself unless you understand how you are wired. If it was as easy as you make it out to be, typology systems would not be unnecessary.

And a little question on the side for better understanding:
Would you say that wanting to be a certain type affects the preference for a type?
(I'd say no, because these are two very different things - but somehow there's something not very clear behind this)

No.

 

[LPolaright]

The MBTI is not broken into steps, so wtf is step 1 and 2?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBTI_Step_II
^^^
Step 2
Also, it is said that step 3 is under development.

First of all MBTI is typing much less than 60% to 75% accurately, and it barely works for a handful of people.

I'll agree to disagree, I think the MBTI types a lot of people accurately. But I think it basically comes down to who you type, what kind of population.
The majority of the people out there in the world are not very thinking (I might be wrong about this, maybe its more like half - but the arbitrary percentage I gave to you comes from this experience) and don't have that much depth in them. So when it comes to typing a stranger that you just met, most of the times the MBTI will catch their personality in great accuracy.
But, when it comes to type sophisticated people I concur, it becomes hard and frustrating.
You write that the system works for barely a handful of people, but then again the only people that actually use this system are pretty sophisticated by the fact that they even found the system (whether it is studying psychology or just the average INTP that seeks for more knowledge) and eventually they'll yap about the fact that they can't type themselves in forums like these (the INTP forum is not very attractive to people who don't know what MBTI stands for - I assure you that).
You gotta put things into proportions.

No, what are they going to do? Relate to the other descriptions that sound nothing like them?

If an over developed person would never know that they are too developed to be typed as one thing, than you basically say that you do not have an over developed personality because you realize the system is wrong. yet you said several times in this post that a person should relate to several description of the MBTI rather then just one and develop different temperament in themselves.
Have I misunderstood you?

Being able to properly type yourself has very little to do with how developed you are, in fact the more developed you are, the harder it is going to be, and you won't know how to do it by yourself unless you understand how you are wired.

You just contradicted yourself in that sentence - or you meant that the "little to do" part is referenced to the fact that the more developed you are the harder it is...

If it was as easy as you make it out to be, typology systems would not be unnecessary.

If it was so hard, they would have never been invented.
Seeing your arguments you'd probably say they indeed never have.

Excuse me for being so direct in certain places - I just want to understand what you claim better. Some parts are probably just misunderstood because of the language (my English is not the best).

Interesting discussion.

 

[Adymus]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBTI_Step_II
^^^
Step 2
Also, it is said that step 3 is under development.

Well it appears I stand corrected, but it's not exactly adding any accuracy to the system.

I'll agree to disagree, I think the MBTI types a lot of people accurately. But I think it basically comes down to who you type, what kind of population.
The majority of the people out there in the world are not very thinking (I might be wrong about this, maybe its more like half - but the arbitrary percentage I gave to you comes from this experience) and don't have that much depth in them. So when it comes to typing a stranger that you just met, most of the times the MBTI will catch their personality in great accuracy.
But, when it comes to type sophisticated people I concur, it becomes hard and frustrating.
You write that the system works for barely a handful of people, but then again the only people that actually use this system are pretty sophisticated by the fact that they even found the system (whether it is studying psychology or just the average INTP that seeks for more knowledge) and eventually they'll yap about the fact that they can't type themselves in forums like these (the INTP forum is not very attractive to people who don't know what MBTI stands for - I assure you that).
You gotta put things into proportions.

Oh? And what exactly are you doing to test the accuracy of MBTI's work? What are using as a control when all you know is MBTI? Is it your own judgment vs their test score? If that is the case, then no offense but I find it rather hard to trust your perspective, especially over mine.

What exactly makes a person Sophisticated? Are you saying INTPs are sophisticated by default? If you are suggesting that Sophistication = high level of development, then I would say you could not be more wrong in your assumption that most of the people that take interest in MBTI are "Sophisticated."

If an over developed person would never know that they are too developed to be typed as one thing, than you basically say that you do not have an over developed personality because you realize the system is wrong. yet you said several times in this post that a person should relate to several description of the MBTI rather then just one and develop different temperament in themselves.
Have I misunderstood you?

Yes, you have clearly misunderstood me. You are confusing the difference between a personality type, and how the test and descriptions present a personality type. Everyone has a type, there is no such thing as being "Over developed". However, the test and descriptions are only looking for proficient use in the top two functions, and disassociation with the bottom two functions. That means if you have developed in such a way that has caused you to either a.) disassociated yourself from your top two functions, or b.) Associate more with any of your bottom two functions; (and this can be do to any kind of development, whether it be a well developed or poorly developed and/or overmodulated individual) This will cause a person to not see themselves in any of the descriptions in particular, or see themselves in several, or the wrong one because they are putting to much focus on the wrong functions.

I never once said that a well developed person cannot be typed as one thing, I said that the MBTI is basically not equipped to know how to handle them.

You just contradicted yourself in that sentence - or you meant that the "little to do" part is referenced to the fact that the more developed you are the harder it is...

No I didn't. Being well developed has little to do with being unable to type yourself, because being developed in anyway that is outside of the MBTI assumption is going skew the accuracy of the test, and cause you to potentially not see yourself in the way the descriptions describe. It is not just exclusive to being well developed.

If it was so hard, they would have never been invented.
Seeing your arguments you'd probably say they indeed never have.

Not true. Regardless if they are typing people accurately or not, they are still addressing an existent pattern. Whether people are typed correctly or not, they still have a structure that consists of 8 cognitive functions in discrete orders. MBTI has does a pretty decent job noting what cognitive functions people might have, but not the right order.
[/QUOTE]

 

[LPolaright]

Well it appears I stand corrected, but it's not exactly adding any accuracy to the system.

I doubt you had time to test it as you tested step I

Oh? And what exactly are you doing to test the accuracy of MBTI's work? What are using as a control when all you know is MBTI? Is it your own judgment vs their test score? If that is the case, then no offense but I find it rather hard to trust your perspective, especially over mine.

You're right, I don't do much in order to test the accuracy of the MBTI's work, maybe sometimes I ask people questions from MBTI tests to actually confirm the results because I want to validate it. But in the mean time all the types that I typed to my Shallower friends they all seem fine - in some cases they predict how a person would tend to react and at other cases they confirm why they chose a decision in the past of our friendship. But yes, in the end it is seeing from my perspective - but all I wanted you to understand is that maybe you are surrounded with very developed people and thus when you try to type them you get stuck, and ergo your perspective on this is negative.
Sure I agree, the system should work all the time but on the other hand you don't have all the facts on a person which might cause problems - that's why the best and accurate typing is self typing (even though it has its own set of problems).

What exactly makes a person Sophisticated? Are you saying INTPs are sophisticated by default? If you are suggesting that Sophistication = high level of development, then I would say you could not be more wrong in your assumption that most of the people that take interest in MBTI are "Sophisticated."

You caught me on a word, I just had enough of typing "overdeveloped" and chose to go to "sophisticated" instead - but clearly it's not the same. INTP's are not sophisticated by default - people that learn the MBTI system independently and seek to understand more knowledge on forums are more of sophisticated by default (although, I don't believe in the "default").
Then again you probably seen more then I did, being all at the forums and all.

Yes, you have clearly misunderstood me. You are confusing the difference between a personality type, and how the test and descriptions present a personality type. Everyone has a type, there is no such thing as being "Over developed". However, the test and descriptions are only looking for proficient use in the top two functions, and disassociation with the bottom two functions. That means if you have developed in such a way that has caused you to either a.) disassociated yourself from your top two functions, or b.) Associate more with any of your bottom two functions; (and this can be do to any kind of development, whether it be a well developed or poorly developed and/or overmodulated individual) This will cause a person to not see themselves in any of the descriptions in particular, or see themselves in several, or the wrong one because they are putting to much focus on the wrong functions.

So basically you're saying that a person can have an MBTI type that will fit him but he just developed his "wrong" functions. I seem to agree with that almost 100%, because I'm probably at that state right now. I can't really seem to type myself accurately because the description of two types fit me perfectly but I probably just developed other functions of mine to the extent that I seem to fit in both.

No I didn't. Being well developed has little to do with being unable to type yourself, because being developed in anyway that is outside of the MBTI assumption is going skew the accuracy of the test, and cause you to potentially not see yourself in the way the descriptions describe. It is not just exclusive to being well developed.

So basically your theory (that you base with others) - the Pod'Lair - is supposed to fix that?

Funny question but are you going for Ph.d with that? Because you seem to have an answer for everything :P

Not true. Regardless if they are typing people accurately or not, they are still addressing an existent pattern. Whether people are typed correctly or not, they still have a structure that consists of 8 cognitive functions in discrete orders. MBTI has does a pretty decent job noting what cognitive functions people might have, but not the right order.

Interesting, you think one could have better success at typing people if he follows a certain order when typing?

I'm sorry if I seem irritating. This conversation seems to develop my thinking over the MBTI more than... more than thinking this through by my own I guess.

 

[Adymus]

I doubt you had time to test it as you tested step I

It didn't take much time, all I had to do was see the basic principle of what they are trying to accomplish, and I can see that it is still not the right direction if accuracy is their goal.

You're right, I don't do much in order to test the accuracy of the MBTI's work, maybe sometimes I ask people questions from MBTI tests to actually confirm the results because I want to validate it. But in the mean time all the types that I typed to my Shallower friends they all seem fine - in some cases they predict how a person would tend to react and at other cases they confirm why they chose a decision in the past of our friendship. But yes, in the end it is seeing from my perspective - but all I wanted you to understand is that maybe you are surrounded with very developed people and thus when you try to type them you get stuck, and ergo your perspective on this is negative.
Sure I agree, the system should work all the time but on the other hand you don't have all the facts on a person which might cause problems - that's why the best and accurate typing is self typing (even though it has its own set of problems).

I have been doing this rigorously (obsessively might even be more accurate) and proactively for quite a long time, and I assure I have seen types of many different kinds and flavors, definitely not just well developed ones. I wish I was surrounded by well developed types all the time.

As for self-Analysis being the most reliable, I could not disagree more. When people are getting inaccurate results it is not necessarily because they are lying to themselves, you can answer questions truthfully to how you see yourself and still be wrong about how you function. First of all, most people just don't know themselves to begin with, you relying on that is a big mistake in itself.
Even if you are honest with yourself, you are still only answering questions based on what you are aware of, the way you see yourself, and knowing yourself is very different from knowing how you function.

The MBTI test was designed to only check for preferred use of your top two functions, and the descriptions of MBTI types are only describing a person that has proficient use of their top two functions, (which is pretty damn undeveloped). That means that a person who has development in more than their top two functions will more than likely test as something else, and they will contradict as well as not relate to the descriptions of types.

When a person begins to develop their lower and less preferred functions, they will begin to become more consciously aware of these functions. Essentially the functions will take up more "space" in the conscious mind than they had before, and they actually become closer to one's identity. This change shifts your perception of who you are (ego), and who you are not (shadow). Because of this, a well developed personality might just look at the MBTI descriptions (which are only describing the bare minimum of development), and say "Ewww, that's not me at all!"

And the thing is, they would actually be right, it isn't them. Let's say you are an ENFP who has very well developed Te. You have worked really hard on developing that Te, you are very proud of it and it has helped you throughout your life. Because of this, it is very likely you are going to answer questions in favor of thinking, because it has become a part of your own perception of self. You can very well think to yourself "Yes I prefer a logic based answer and solution" even if you are a feeler, and still not really be lying to yourself, because when said ENFP uses their Te, they get good results, which is why they think that they "prefer" it, even if it might not be a natural preference function for them.

You caught me on a word, I just had enough of typing "overdeveloped" and chose to go to "sophisticated" instead - but clearly it's not the same. INTP's are not sophisticated by default - people that learn the MBTI system independently and seek to understand more knowledge on forums are more of sophisticated by default (although, I don't believe in the "default").
Then again you probably seen more then I did, being all at the forums and all.

Whether you believe people who want to know themselves better are to be considered "Sophisticated" or not is up to your personal opinion. But I assure you, having a desire to want to understand your mind is definitely not the same as being well developed. However at the very least it might mean that you have a desire to develop yourself, which is great, but it doesn't mean that you have done it yet.

So basically you're saying that a person can have an MBTI type that will fit him but he just developed his "wrong" functions. I seem to agree with that almost 100%, because I'm probably at that state right now. I can't really seem to type myself accurately because the description of two types fit me perfectly but I probably just developed other functions of mine to the extent that I seem to fit in both.

I'm going to have to check you on something one more time. You are using the word "Fit", which makes me a little concerned as to whether you are fully understanding what a personality type is. Your personality type always fits, it can't not fit. Your personality type exists even if you are not aware of it, even if you have no interest in psychology, you still have a personality type. Your personality type is defined and determined by your biological nature, not by how you agree with a description.
MBTI tries to capture the essence of each type in a description, but that is not a very good approach because the types are not so one dimensional that they can be captured in a single description. A description is simply describing one possible manifestation of a configuration of cognitive functions. Do you understand that I am saying that there is a difference between a personality type, and MBTI's description of what a personality type is? This is why a person might read a description, and not feel that it is accurately describing them, but it is truthfully not how they see themselves, even though that description is trying to describe the type that they actually are. There are no such thing as the "wrong" functions, unless by "wrong" you mean that the person developed identity and proficiency with functions in ways that the MBTI can not predict. If that is the case, then you are quite right.

So basically your theory (that you base with others) - the Pod'Lair - is supposed to fix that?

Absolutely, we bypass the process of having to take a test or know yourself entirely. By the way, I hear you are trying to be a Mentalist? You should check us out, you would probably make good use of our methods of reading people.

Interesting, you think one could have better success at typing people if he follows a certain order when typing?

Well yes, you should always have the hierarchy of cognitive functions in mind.

I'm sorry if I seem irritating. This conversation seems to develop my thinking over the MBTI more than... more than thinking this through by my own I guess.

It's no trouble at all.

 

[LPolaright]

It didn't take much time, all I had to do was see the basic principle of what they are trying to accomplish, and I can see that it is still not the right direction if accuracy is their goal.

You seem so confident about the fact that you know what is the right direction of accuracy... Might you be a just a little bit blind to maybe consider this at all? I'm just saying - you already have a position against the MBTI, now that you realized there's a step II, maybe you took your first position and added an already known logic and contradicted it without really considering the option that it might be a little be more accurate? I'm asking because I'm worried a little bit that you seriously didn't take the time to check the theory out of prejudice thoughts.

As for self-Analysis being the most reliable, I could not disagree more.

You seem to agree about the fact that it has it's own set of problems which can lead it to be inaccurate (which you presented).

But if you say that you disagree about the fact that it is the most reliable method then it probably means that you agree that an outside source will type someone more accurately. I disagree because although a person from the outside might be more aware of your development he can't possibly know if the subject that is being typed is fully cooperative and trustworthy to actually present him with his current and past standings. So basically that development could be a lie in the first place.

Typing someone else is adding another dimension to the already existing problems in self analysis (although solving some problems, giving even more problems in return).

The MBTI test was designed to only check for preferred use of your top two functions, and the descriptions of MBTI types are only describing a person that has proficient use of their top two functions, (which is pretty damn undeveloped). That means that a person who has development in more than their top two functions will more than likely test as something else, and they will contradict as well as not relate to the descriptions of types.

When a person begins to develop their lower and less preferred functions, they will begin to become more consciously aware of these functions. Essentially the functions will take up more "space" in the conscious mind than they had before, and they actually become closer to one's identity. This change shifts your perception of who you are (ego), and who you are not (shadow). Because of this, a well developed personality might just look at the MBTI descriptions (which are only describing the bare minimum of development), and say "Ewww, that's not me at all!"

And the thing is, they would actually be right, it isn't them. Let's say you are an ENFP who has very well developed Te. You have worked really hard on developing that Te, you are very proud of it and it has helped you throughout your life. Because of this, it is very likely you are going to answer questions in favor of thinking, because it has become a part of your own perception of self. You can very well think to yourself "Yes I prefer a logic based answer and solution" even if you are a feeler, and still not really be lying to yourself, because when said ENFP uses their Te, they get good results, which is why they think that they "prefer" it, even if it might not be a natural preference function for them.

So basically, will it mean that if you type yourself before the point of development you will get a more accurate result? If so, why can't a person analyse himself before the beginning of the actual development and do it correctly? (Except for the obvious reasons of memory and a lot of self awareness to the development process)

Whether you believe people who want to know themselves better are to be considered "Sophisticated" or not is up to your personal opinion. But I assure you, having a desire to want to understand your mind is definitely not the same as being well developed. However at the very least it might mean that you have a desire to develop yourself, which is great, but it doesn't mean that you have done it yet.

Alright, I get your point. But would you say that in order to develop yourself you would need atleast a little bit of interest to know yourself first?

MBTI tries to capture the essence of each type in a description, but that is not a very good approach because the types are not so one dimensional that they can be captured in a single description. A description is simply describing one possible manifestation of a configuration of cognitive functions. Do you understand that I am saying that there is a difference between a personality type, and MBTI's description of what a personality type is? This is why a person might read a description, and not feel that it is accurately describing them, but it is truthfully not how they see themselves, even though that description is trying to describe the type that they actually are.

Then it basically means that I gotta understand better the cognitive functions rather than the descriptions given to me. You got any places of information that you recommend for that purpose?

Absolutely, we bypass the process of having to take a test or know yourself entirely. By the way, I hear you are trying to be a Mentalist? You should check us out, you would probably make good use of our methods of reading people.

http://www.podlairproductions.com/ - is this the main website by any chance? If so, I'd be thrilled to check into everything that is written there!

Also, I wonder where is everyone in this post - it seems that it's just me and you here reviewing the thread

 

[Adymus]

You seem so confident about the fact that you know what is the right direction of accuracy... Might you be a just a little bit blind to maybe consider this at all? I'm just saying - you already have a position against the MBTI, now that you realized there's a step II, maybe you took your first position and added an already known logic and contradicted it without really considering the option that it might be a little be more accurate? I'm asking because I'm worried a little bit that you seriously didn't take the time to check the theory out of prejudice thoughts.

I am seeing a bigger picture than MBTI is addressing, it is the opposite of blindness. When you have a system that is as massively flawed as MBTI, you are going to need more than a minor addendum to fixed. Step II is like putting band-aid on a corpse, MBTI needs complete reform, not just a slight addition. The fact that I can clearly see that they make no effort to correct the mistakes that already exist tells me that the problems that were already there are still there. Until they address these flaws, MBTI will still suck.

But if you say that you disagree about the fact that it is the most reliable method then it probably means that you agree that an outside source will type someone more accurately. I disagree because although a person from the outside might be more aware of your development he can't possibly know if the subject that is being typed is fully cooperative and trustworthy to actually present him with his current and past standings. So basically that development could be a lie in the first place.

If you know how to read people, (see pod'lair for details) then you will know how to see through that. You cannot act like any other type than you are, you have an innate nature, and there is no avoiding that. But again, you need people reading skills to be able to pull this off.

So basically, will it mean that if you type yourself before the point of development you will get a more accurate result? If so, why can't a person analyse himself before the beginning of the actual development and do it correctly? (Except for the obvious reasons of memory and a lot of self awareness to the development process)

I literally just answered this question, I'll repeat myself one last time. It does not matter how much you have analyzed yourself! Knowing yourself will not solve the problem! The MBTI concepts of types are not realistic, they are one-dimensional, knowing yourself will not make you seem more like MBTI descriptions at all! When an MBTI test asks "Do you enjoy being in large crowds?" By knowing myself, I know the answer to that question is "Fuck yeah I like large crowds!", because of that, the MBTI test just scored me in favor of Extrovert. I'm damn sure not an extrovert, but I do happen to be comfortable in large crowds. The problem is not know what you can do, it is knowing what is coming natural to you, and people are not equipped to figure that out on their own simply by analyzing themselves, they have to have it pointed out for them. Do you have any idea how many times I have corrected a person's type on this forum? Do you have any idea how many hours those people spent analyzing themselves, and still didn't get their type right until I stepped in? If it was no help for them, why the fuck would it help everyone else?

Alright, I get your point. But would you say that in order to develop yourself you would need atleast a little bit of interest to know yourself first?

Sure, why not.

Then it basically means that I gotta understand better the cognitive functions rather than the descriptions given to me. You got any places of information that you recommend for that purpose?

http://www.podlairproductions.com/

Do understand though, that we are not MBTI, we are a completely different system with completely different principles that need to be learned. So before continuing, empty your mind of all that you picked up from MBTI.

Also, I wonder where is everyone in this post - it seems that it's just me and you here reviewing the thread

This post is fucking ancient, they are over it.

 

[cheese]

I'm still reading, LPolaright. Welcome by the way. Pod'lair doesn't rely on any verbal information provided by the person about any of their life experiences or thought processes (correct me if I'm wrong) - rather it relies on visible physical cues that are, according to theory, impossible to fake or hide. This is why its method is different to MBTI's, and why most of your contentions aren't really relevant. Whether it's superior or not is up for debat-

*silently strangled by Adymus*

ungghhhh....hh..............h

 

[viche]

I actually agree with socionics description of 3rd element as being inert in that you cannot really develop and boost its strength, but other functions seem to get exercised in its favor. Typically INFJs with weaker Ti have stronger Fe-Se and they are higher on extraversion scale and more socially/physically adept, while those with stronger Ti have poorer use of their Fe and Se. Calling personality types that don't enjoy using their tertiary "under-developed" or "bottom of the barrel" is inaccurate - they are stronger in other areas.

Another reason that tertiary and inferior get rejected so vehemently on MBTI forums is in age. I've seen polls done on age on these types of forums and typically 80% of the population is in 15-25 age bracket. This means that a lot of these posters haven't started to develop their tertiary or inferior, or have just recently started developing the tertiary. Quite obviously they are not mature personalities yet and don't know themselves well enough to be able to answer questions on MBTI test accurately.

 

[Bird]

I have been perusing the INFJ forum recently, and I have noticed a pattern that is all too common.

They will accuse me of being wrong, and then challenge me by making a claim.

I disagree with their claim, and counter their argument with my own.

They realize I have actually thought my argument through, shit their pants, then their poorly developed Ti squeals in fear, and then they flee.

So I thought to myself "Wow, they are so scared to death of their own Ti, that they are not even going to attempt to use it. Instead they just say "I don't want to argue with you, we'll never see eye to eye!" and storm off, even though they are the ones that started the argument in the first place."

That is actually pathetic for an INFJ, to have only strong use of your Ni and Fe, and nothing else. I got the thinking "So is this what people think of when they hear INFJ? Wow, no wonder everyone's perception of personality types is so screwed up."

That is when it hit me.

It is the test, as well as the descriptions. The test is technically only checking proficiency in your top two functions, and the descriptions are only describing a person that has proficient use of their top two function. That means that a person who has developed more than their Top two functions will more than likely test as something else, and they will contradict and not relate to the description.
So the people that take the test and have accurate results are most likely not a well developed model of their personality type, unless of course they know themselves very well. And the types that are actually well developed are being mistyped as something else. Which is why the INFJs that get mistyped as INTP are all strong Ti users, and are who I personally consider the "True" INFJs, as opposed to their weaker counter parts that you find on INFJf.

What this means, is that MBTI has created perceptions and understandings of personality types that is based solely on the most bottom of the barrel, undeveloped versions of these types. And I when I say "bottom of the barrel" I really mean it, having only proficient use of your two near side functions is terrible.

No really, think about this for a second, your only real understand of personality type is based only on a description of the most poorly developed personalities, and we are ascribing all personalities, including the well developed ones to these descriptions. Do you see now how terribly incompetent this system is?

I am not surprised that the MBTI is only applicable to 60% to 75%, because the rest do fit into the 16 types, because they have developed themselves farther than the test can predict, and the descriptions can describe. It is no wonder everyone thinks the INFP are all mopey emo kids, they are only looking at the worst models.

And I am not just hating on the INFJ either, because you INTPs are no different. The idea of an INTP that has proficient use of Si or Fe is almost alien to you guys. Which is why most of you are so quick to jump on the "That guy is a J!" train as soon as you see the first sign of directiveness in an INTP. It is almost as if being well developed is discouraged in MBTI, and that really pisses me off.

This attitude of discouraging the use of all but our two top functions is completely asinine and just plain destructive. There is nothing good about having only proficient use of half of your abilities, the personality model that has a proficiency in all of their functions will always be stronger than the one that does not.

Edit: Yes, I do realized that being mistyped does not automagically mean you are well developed. It could mean a number of things, ranging from not knowing yourself, to Having an unusual development pattern such as Dominant and Tertiary well developed, and Auxiliary and Inferior underdeveloped. But the statement I made is still relevant regardless of the other possibilities.

I am being verious when I say that I
think you should post this on the INFJ
forum. I am not going to lie to you and
say that it would be accepted graciously
and respectfully but I do think it would
be good for their character.


Unless you have...
and I just haven't seen the thread.